PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 8, 2008
Clean Cruise Ship Act of 2008 - Prohibits cruise vessels calling on U.S. ports from discharging sewage, graywater, or bilge water into U.S. waters unless: (1) the treated effluent meets specified effluent limits and management standards; (2) the vessel is proceeding at not less than six knots; (3) the vessel is not less than 12 nautical miles from shore; and (4) the vessel is not in a no discharge zone. Prohibits the discharge of sewage sludge, incinerator ash, or hazardous waste into U.S. waters and requires it to be off-loaded at appropriate land-based facilities. Prescribes exceptions for: (1) discharges solely to secure the safety of a vessel or to save a life at sea; and (2) Alaskan vessels until 10 years after enactment.
Requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to promulgate such effluent limits that: (1) are consistent with the capability of the best available technology to treat effluent; (2) require compliance with state and federal water quality standards; (3) take into account the best available scientific information on environmental effects; and (4) require treated discharges to meet specified standards for minimum effluent quality, fecal coliform, and residual chlorine.
Requires the EPA Administrator to implement a sampling and testing program, and requires the Commandant of the Coast Guard to implement an inspection program, sufficient to verify that such vessels are in compliance with this Act, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and other applicable federal laws and international agreements.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Commandant to establish a program for the placement of trained independent observers on vessels to monitor and inspect vessel operations, equipment, and discharges.
Requires the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to carry out a pilot program to develop and promote commercialization of technologies to provide federal agencies data regarding discharges from vessels and functioning of vessel components relating to fuel consumption and air and water pollution control.
Calls for enactment of standards for: (1) ballast water; and (2) air quality regarding incineration and engine activities of vessels.
Establishes the Cruise Vessel Pollution Control Fund. Requires the Commandant to collect fees from vessels for paying passengers to be deposited in such Fund for use in carrying out this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Farr, Sam [D-CA-17] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1414-1415)
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.6434 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.6434 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.6434 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.6434 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.